organizational behavior and organizational change ...rnn0/bio/emba/emba06.pdf · organizational...
TRANSCRIPT
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
1
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Organizational Behavior andOrganizational Change
Organizational Structure
Roger N. NagelSenior Fellow & Wagner Professor
Lehigh University
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
2
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Topics This PresentationWhat Is Organizational Structure?Common Organization Designs
“Organizational behavior”Eleventh Edition
By Steve RobbinsISBN 0-13-191435-9
Reference Book
“Organizational behavior”Eleventh Edition
By Steve RobbinsISBN 0-13-191435-9
Reference Book
2
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l b e h a v i o ro r g a n i z a t i o n a l b e h a v i o r
stephen p. robbins
e l e v e n t h e d i t i o ne l e v e n t h e d i t i o n
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
3
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
What Is Organizational Structure?
Key Elements:
• Work specialization
• Departmentalization
• Chain of command
• Span of control
• Centralization and decentralization
• Formalization
Key Elements:
• Work specialization
• Departmentalization
• Chain of command
• Span of control
• Centralization and decentralization
• Formalization
Organizational Structure
How job tasks are formally divided, grouped, and coordinated.
Page 452Page 452
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
4
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Key Design Questions and Answers for Designing the Proper Organization Structure
E X H I B I T 15–1 Page 453
E X H I B I T 15–1 Page 453
The Key Question The Answer Is Provided By
1. To what degree are articles Work specializationsubdivided into separate jobs?
2. On what basis will jobs be grouped Departmentalizationtogether?
3. To whom do individuals and groups Chain of commandreport?
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
5
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Key Design Questions and Answers for Designing the Proper Organization Structure
E X H I B I T 15–1 Page 453
E X H I B I T 15–1 Page 453
The Key Question The Answer Is Provided By
4. How many individuals can a manager Span of controlefficiently and effectively direct?
5. Where does decision-making Centralizationauthority lie? and decentralization
6. To what degree will there be rules Formalizationand regulations to direct employeesand managers?
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
6
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
What Is Organizational Structure?
Grouping Activities By:
• Function
• Product
• Geography
• Process
• Customer
Grouping Activities By:
• Function
• Product
• Geography
• Process
• Customer
Departmentalization
The basis by which jobs are grouped together.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
7
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
What Is Organizational Structure?
Chain of CommandThe unbroken line of authority that extends from the top of the organization to the lowest echelon and clarifies who reports to whom.
AuthorityThe rights inherent in a managerial position to give orders and to expect the orders to be obeyed.
Unity of CommandA subordinate should have only one superior to whom he or she is directly responsible.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
8
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
What Is Organizational Structure?
Narrow Span Drawbacks:• Expense of additional layers of management.• Increased complexity of vertical communication.• Encouragement of overly tight supervision and
discouragement of employee autonomy.
Narrow Span Drawbacks:• Expense of additional layers of management.• Increased complexity of vertical communication.• Encouragement of overly tight supervision and
discouragement of employee autonomy.
Concept:Wider spans of management increase organizational efficiency.
Concept:Concept:Wider spans of management increase organizational Wider spans of management increase organizational efficiency.efficiency.
Span of ControlThe number of subordinates a manager can efficiently and effectively direct.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
9
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Contrasting Spans of Control
E X H I B I T 15–3 page 457
E X H I B I T 15–3 page 457
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
10
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
What Is Organizational Structure? CentralizationThe degree to which decision making is concentrated at a single point in the organization.
FormalizationThe degree to which jobs within the organization are standardized.
DecentralizationThe degree to which decision making is spread throughout the organization.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
11
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Source: S. Adams, Dogbert’s Big Book of Business, DILBERT E X H I B I T 15–4 Page 459
E X H I B I T 15–4 Page 459
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
12
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Common Organization Designs
A Simple Structure:Jack Gold’s Men’s Store
A Simple Structure:Jack Gold’s Men’s Store
Simple Structure
A structure characterized by a low degree of departmentalization, wide spans of control, authority centralized in a single person, and little formalization.
E X H I B I T 15–5 Page 460
E X H I B I T 15–5 Page 460
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
13
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Common Organization DesignsBureaucracy
A structure of highly operating routine tasks achieved through specialization, very formalized rules and regulations, tasks that are grouped into functional departments, centralized authority, narrow spans of control, and decision making that follows the chain of command.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
14
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
The Bureaucracy
StrengthsFunctional economies of scaleMinimum duplication of personnel and equipmentEnhanced communicationCentralized decision making
WeaknessesSubunit conflicts with organizational goalsObsessive concern with rules and regulationsLack of employee discretion to deal with problems
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
15
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Common Organization Designs
Key Elements:+ Gains the advantages of functional and product
departmentalization while avoiding their weaknesses.
+ Facilitates coordination of complex and interdependent activities.
– Breaks down unity-of-command concept.
Key Elements:+ Gains the advantages of functional and product
departmentalization while avoiding their weaknesses.
+ Facilitates coordination of complex and interdependent activities.
– Breaks down unity-of-command concept.
Matrix Structure
A structure that creates dual lines of authority and combines functional and product departmentalization.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
16
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Matrix Structure (College of Business Administration)
(Dean)
(Director)
Employee
E X H I B I T 15–6E X H I B I T 15–6
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
17
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
New Design Options
Characteristics:• Breaks down departmental barriers.• Decentralizes decision making to the team level.• Requires employees to be generalists as well as
specialists.• Creates a “flexible bureaucracy.”
Characteristics:• Breaks down departmental barriers.• Decentralizes decision making to the team level.• Requires employees to be generalists as well as
specialists.• Creates a “flexible bureaucracy.”
Team Structure
The use of teams as the central device to coordinate work activities.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
18
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
New Design Options
Concepts:Advantage: Provides maximum flexibility while concentrating on what the organization does best.
Disadvantage: Reduced control over key parts of the business.
Concepts:Advantage: Provides maximum flexibility while concentrating on what the organization does best.
Disadvantage: Reduced control over key parts of the business.
Virtual Organization
A small, core organization that outsources its major business functions.
Highly centralized with little or no departmentalization.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
19
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
First
E-procurement•Access•Transaction
Second
Logistics•Transaction•Digitization
Third
E-Business•Digitization•Virtual ORG
Fourth SCM & ERP•Virtual ORG•Collaborate NW
Then
Co development•Collaborate NW•Innovation NW
Diagram Source General ElectricThe Intelligent Supply Chain
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
20
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Common Goals Partner Collaboration Innovation
This is achieved through the integration of information with the people, cultural and organizational issues that could otherwise prevent the network from being smart.
The transition from one level to the next requires a major paradigm shift that should not be taken for granted.
Virtual Organization
Collaboration Network
Innovation Network
Phase Transition
Phase Transition
Source Cisco
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
21
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
A dynamic set of companiesThat come together for a time based and opportunity driven goalRelationships vary from formal to informal,They need to practice working together to learn to communicate, share information, and IP etc.Moderate interaction
Limited scope of activities Limited collaborationMany fail over trust issues
Virtual Organization
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
22
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Provide value in many ways:
Global convenience –One WorldStandards – Rosetta NetVirtual resources – Pabst
Finding compatible partners –Solid works Manufacturing Network
Franchise (Node) Charisma –Ritz Carlton
Virtual Organization
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
23
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
A set of companies who share a short and long term roadmap or vision and focus significant resources on value producing Intensive interaction
Committed and involved in the goals and success of all collaboratorsExtensive Information Sharing Integrated Infrastructure facilitates both people and information networking
CollaborationNetwork
Product Vs. Product
Supply Chain Vs. Supply Chain
Process Vs. Process
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
24
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Can redefine an Can redefine an industryindustry and provide value in many ways:
Distributed location & authority - CNNSwarm effect –VISA Network & Node Charisma -
CollaborationNetwork
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
25
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Level Value Proposition Enabled Simple Example
CollaborationNetwork
Virtual Organization
Innovation Network
Rosetta NetOne WorldHoliday Inn, Hertz
DuPontCiscoVisa, Master Card
Li & FongAgile Web of PAAcheron’s Call
StandardsGlobal Alliance Franchise
Collaboration HubNode & Network CharismaSwarm Effect
Network EconomyDynamic TeamsVirtual Reality
Act smart in terms of how the individual members coordinate, collaborate, innovate and organize themselves
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
26
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
A Virtual Organization
E X H I B I T 15–7E X H I B I T 15–7
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
27
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
New Design Options
T-form Concepts:Eliminate vertical (hierarchical) and horizontal (departmental) internal boundaries.
Breakdown external barriers to customers and suppliers.
T-form Concepts:Eliminate vertical (hierarchical) and horizontal (departmental) internal boundaries.
Breakdown external barriers to customers and suppliers.
Boundaryless Organization
An organization that seeks to eliminate the chain of command, have limitless spans of control, and replace departments with empowered teams.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
28
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Why Do Structures Differ?Mechanistic Model
A structure characterized by extensive departmentalization, high formalization, a limited information network, and centralization.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
29
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Why Do Structures Differ?Organic Model
A structure that is flat, uses cross-hierarchical and cross-functional teams, has low formalization, possesses a comprehensive information network, and relies on participative decision making.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
30
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Mechanistic Versus Organic Models
E X H I B I T 15–8E X H I B I T 15–8
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
31
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Why Do Structures Differ? – StrategyInnovation StrategyA strategy that emphasizes the introduction of major new products and services.
Imitation StrategyA strategy that seeks to move into new products or new markets only after their viability has already been proven.
Cost-minimization StrategyA strategy that emphasizes tight cost controls, avoidance of unnecessary innovation or marketing expenses, and price cutting.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
32
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
The Strategy-Structure Relationship
E X H I B I T 15–9E X H I B I T 15–9
Strategy Structural Option
Innovation Organic: A loose structure; low specialization, low formalization, decentralized
Cost minimization Mechanistic: Tight control; extensive work specialization, high formalization, high centralization
Imitation Mechanistic and organic: Mix of loose with tight properties; tight controls over current activities and looser controls for new undertakings
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
33
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Why Do Structures Differ? – Size
Characteristics of large organizations:• More specialization• More vertical levels• More rules and regulations
Characteristics of large organizations:• More specialization• More vertical levels• More rules and regulations
Size
How the size of an organization affects its structure. As an organization grows larger, it becomes more mechanistic.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
34
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Why Do Structures Differ? – Technology
Characteristics of routineness (standardized or customized) in activities:
• Routine technologies are associated with tall, departmentalized structures and formalization in organizations.
• Routine technologies lead to centralization when formalization is low.
• Nonroutine technologies are associated with delegated decision authority.
Characteristics of routineness (standardized or customized) in activities:
• Routine technologies are associated with tall, departmentalized structures and formalization in organizations.
• Routine technologies lead to centralization when formalization is low.
• Nonroutine technologies are associated with delegated decision authority.
Technology
How an organization transfers its inputs into outputs.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
35
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Why Do Structures Differ? – Environment
Key Dimensions-• Capacity: the degree to which an environment can
support growth.
• Volatility: the degree of instability in the environment.
• Complexity: the degree of heterogeneity and concentration among environmental elements.
Key Dimensions-• Capacity: the degree to which an environment can
support growth.
• Volatility: the degree of instability in the environment.
• Complexity: the degree of heterogeneity and concentration among environmental elements.
Environment
Institutions or forces outside the organization that potentially affect the organization’s performance.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
36
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
The Three Dimensional Model of the Environment
Complexity
Volatility
Capacity
E X H I B I T 15–10E X H I B I T 15–10
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
37
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
“Bureaucracy Is Dead”
Characteristics of Bureaucracies
SpecializationFormalizationDepartmentalizationCentralizationNarrow spans of controlAdherence to a chain of command.
Why Bureaucracy SurvivesLarge size prevails.Environmental turbulence can be largely managed.Standardization achieved through hiring people who have undergone extensive educational training.Technology maintains control.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
38
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Organizational Designs and Employee Behavior
Research Findings:
• Work specialization contributes to higher employee productivity, but it reduces job satisfaction.
• The benefits of specialization have decreased rapidly as employees seek more intrinsically rewarding jobs.
• The effect of span of control on employee performance is contingent upon individual differences and abilities, task structures, and other organizational factors.
• Participative decision making in decentralized organizations is positively related to job satisfaction.
Research Findings:
• Work specialization contributes to higher employee productivity, but it reduces job satisfaction.
• The benefits of specialization have decreased rapidly as employees seek more intrinsically rewarding jobs.
• The effect of span of control on employee performance is contingent upon individual differences and abilities, task structures, and other organizational factors.
• Participative decision making in decentralized organizations is positively related to job satisfaction.
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
39
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
Organization Structure: Its Determinants and Outcomes
Implicit Models of Organizational StructurePerceptions that people hold regarding structural variables formed by observing things around them in an unscientific fashion.
E X H I B I T 15–11E X H I B I T 15–11
CSE & Enterprise Systems CenterLehigh University
40
Roger N. Nagel © 2006
XIE XIERoger N. Nagel
Wagner Professor and Senior Fellow CSE Department &
The Enterprise Systems Center at Lehigh University 200 West Packer Avenue
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, 18015(610) 758-4086, (610) 868-0402 [fax]